that familiarity with the internet, they are going to find value with it and use it and be productive with it every day. and half of the city's population that's in the other boat is disconnected from all that potential prosperity. >> we really need to promote content and provide applications that are really relevant to people's lives here. so a lot of the inspiration, especially among the immigrant community, we see is communications with people from their home country but we as much want to use the internet as a tool for people to connect within the local san francisco community. >> i think it's our job as public educators to give them this access and give them this opportunity to see that their efforts are being appreciated beyond their immediate reach. >> you have to blend this idea of community network with computer equipment with training and with support. we can pull all that together, then we've got it. >> it's as much about social and economic justice -- in fact

it's more about social and economic justice than just >> >> good morning, everyone. ed meeting will come to order. this is the tuesday, december tenth, 2013, meeting of the plans and programs committee of the san francisco county transportation authority, our clerk is miss erika cheng, could you call the roll?

>> roll call, commissioner breed? >> here. >> commissioner campos? >> absent. >> kim, absent fp >> mar. >> present. >> yee? >> yee, present. >> we have a quorum. >> thank you, and i would like to thank, jim smith and johnson gramwhack from sfgtv for tell vicing us today. >> item number two, approve the minutes of the november 19, 2013 meeting this is an action item. >> thank you, seeing no comments from colleagues, let's open up this for public comment, is there anyone from the public? seeing none, the public comment is closed could we moved this forward without objection? thank you. >> item three, citizen's advisory committee report, this is an information report. >> and we have the vice chair of the committee joseph flanagan.

>> >> good morning commissioners my name and i am the vice chair, sorry, joseph flanagan. there are a few items on your agenda that the cac took action on on december 4th, meeting. they are the items for allocation of prop k funds for three requests. and in addition, items, we took action on two of the items.

number one, 463,000, for the street repair and cleaning equipment and we deferred action pending additional information regarding the cost share of changes stations to reduce the prop k request number 2. 4,,000 for the bartlet street scape improvements project. we voted nearly unanimously for this item with one abstaining. item five adoption of the sf

gp, we again, passed with a near unanimous vote of one substation, item six, recommended approval for a 2013 san francisco congestion management program and we have passed unanimously by the cac, thank you very much and that includes, and thank you very much and i can take any questions. >> thank you, vice chair, any questions, colleagues? >> i see no questions. thank you so much for that report. >> thank you very much. >> miss cheng, could you call the next item? let's open up this up for public comment, is there anyone that would like to speak? seeing none, public comment is

closed. >> item four,recommend allocation of $4,563,090 in prop k funds, with conditions, for three requests, subject to the attached fiscal year cash flow distribution schedules and amendment of the relevant 5-year prioritization programs . this is an action item. >> thank you, and we have courtney mcgeary, and other members from the mta and bart with us here as well. good morning, with the authority this past month, we reviewed a total of 3 prop k allocation requests totaling 4.5 million, the department of public works has requested prop k funds for construction of the part let project ideas stemming from the mission street scape plan and an effort led by the plan and adopted in 2010, intended to create a flexibility urban public space on bartlett between 21st and 22nd street. before you is a visual of what the projects will look like

upon completing. the projects anticipated result in the loss of 34 parking spaces and 56 existing spaces which may be mitigated with the use of an adjacent parking structure that is often under utilized and maintains and operated by the sfmta. the project manager assured our committee that community stake holders were involved in the decision to reduce the parking and determined that the benefits of the project far out weighed the law. >> the project is currently under going final design anticipated to be completed in the next month, dpw anticipates completing by january of 2015 and this is another visual of what it may look like during an event. the department of public works has requested prop k fund to procure six pieces of cleaning equipment, these will replace the existing vehicles that have

reached the end of their useful lives, the citizen's advisory committee was briefed at the december meeting and adopted the motion to refer the request sighting the concerns of the high cost and the potential for the charging units to be used for non-street cleaning purposes. the department of public works requests presenting to the committee today despite the citizen advisory deferal action, they have confirmed that these are the highest use of funds from this category and confirmed that these vehicles charging stations while they may be used by other city departments for other vehicles, electric, units procured by using prop k, will require a charging unit to re, power, over night. >> they anticipate that it will be completed by june of 2015. and i should also note that these vehicles the procurement of them is consistent with the

city's action plan. >> finally, we will request that you consider last month, the sfmta has interested 3.7 million for the construction to upgrade, 17 escalators in the subway, and in the november plans and committee, this committee again was briefed on this item, and the committee decided to defer the action pending additional information from the sfmta regarding the over all escalator plan and policies regarding outdoor canopies. and we have included new information in the topics and you can also review additional information from the sfmta in the attachment four, and today, sfmta staff are present to respond to your concerns, and they have a brief presentation that they have prepared as well as bart staff who are present to deliver a presentation on the pilot escalator program. with that i will hand it off to jonathan.

>> thank you. >> mr. louis? >> i just like to say that we have johnson from the sfmta, john from bart, and samoc jock from the dpw as well. >> and colleagues i think that it is a red powerpoint that we have in front of us, and the escalator. thank you, chair members and the plans and programs, i am jonathan with the mta and i am here to discuss quickly our maintenance plan for the escalators on the system, and i appreciate the questions from commissioner campos who is not here right now, but it is always great when we get an opportunity to talk to the public and to you about the state of good repair about the system, and to have the opportunity to invest in it and just really quickly, the

escalator systems were built as part of the system, and the sfmta is responsible for the 28 of these escalators and we have maintained them through a contract with cone which is the actual manufacturer since that period of time and since they are 25 years old, they are at the end of their useful life and it is at this point that we are beginning a renovation program, phase one of the program replacement program replaced five my priority escalators in 2013 and this phase two request is for the detailed design to preplace 17 on the system for a total of 18.5 million and that project is anticipated to be completed in the winter of 2018. just really quickly, i wanted to cover the actual replacement plan and note where the actual escalators are. and a number of the escalators are part of the joint main nens

program are maintained and have to do with the escalators to the street and all of the escalators that go from the level down to the muni pret toe they are responsible for maintaining, you will see the escalators were completed as part of phase one. and phase two, includes escalators at montgomery station, and powell, and san ef station and church read station and castro station, the escalators at embarcadero are not part of phase two and will be completed as a subsequent phase because they are the newest working with the oldest and most used escalators first. >> just really quickly, one of the questions had to do with the sustainability of the escalator and how we are upgrading them. this has to do with kind of weather proofing them to the greatest extent possible. so the new escalators include solid, stainless steel panels and oil free chains and water

proof, and so they have been weatherized to deal with the weather and noting that with the escalators that we are responsible for maintaining but they need to be weather proof and account for that. but we need to include these materials to make sure that they could stand the test of time. finally specifically what the maintenance plan is part of your memo, again, in may of 2013, the board of directors approved a new master contract with cone, for an amount of 1.4 million dollars which includes the maintenance of the escalator system over five years, some things that i do want to note is that the staff delayed bringing the maintenance contract forward to the board until we could test the escalator completed as part of phase one, and since cone is the manufacturer he wanted to make sure and we wanted to include everything possible in the subsequent maintenance contract and so we tested it out for a few months and delayed the contract and now that we know the issues that could arise with the kaes lay

tores we made sure that the components are considered as part of the maintenance contract. the contract is fully funded as part of the transit division budget, over the next five years and it includes labor, and materials, equipment, and other incidental service and i do want to stress that was one of the questions of the commissioners that the main nens contract that we have actually exceeds the manufacturer's standard main nens plan that they give with these escalators. so i have kenny with me and scott broder, kenny is the project manager and scott is in charge of the maintenance, if you have any more questions. >> i had a question, so there are 28 escalators at 7 stations that the mta is responsible for, and does this include the 16th street and 24th street bart stations for example, or glen park? >> no, those are included as part of bart, bater is responsible for the maipt nens of those. >> and when was the last time, so these are 40 years old, it

looks like 41 years old, when was the last time that bart replaced some of the other eastern neighbor stations. >> right, it is something that i could check with bart with and get back to you on. >> okay. now, maybe, the bart rep who is here might have answers. >> thank you, and commissioner yee? >> so, in the... i guess that i am trying to figure out in regards to this phase two escalator rehabilitation, it looks like it is going to modernize or replace 17 escalators? >> correct. >> and so there is eleven others, what is going to happen to the eleven others? so five were completed as part

of phase one and the remaining 6 escalators are at embarcadero and since those were the last stations to be added as part of the system and so those are our newest escalator and will be completed as part of a phase three. >> and so explain to me as we replace these, and they are supposed to be hopefully easier to maintain, because a lot of the things that you are doing, why are we paying more for maintenance? >> i am not saying that we would pay any more, the contract that we have is the standard contract that we have and so the 1.5 million is over a five year period for the main nens of the escalators and the major issue that i have with maintenance right now with cone has to do with the parts because the actual escalators are so old, the parts are being fabric ated and the cost is higher, as we replace, we are counting on the actual cost of the main nens to go down as we go down through the system. >> thank you. >> i see no other questions,

thank you. are there other reps from the departments that would like to make any points as well? >> and i am interested in dpw explanation of the electric vehicle truck as well. that is the first that i have heard of large vehicles that are electric, and electrically chargable as well. >> the budget manager with the department of public works, we are actually not replacing trucks with trucks, our plan is to down size where possible, so the folks that are using these particular trucks don't necessarily carry heavy equipment, and so we are looking to down size. the electric vehicles, we have looked for electric trucks and unfortunately they don't exist yet in the way that we would like to use them. did that address your question? >> so n stead of purchasing, 6

electric vehicles, not trucks. >> right. >> very good. >> the charging station a rapid charging station? i know that there are different types. >> we had actually planned to the budget does include the rapid charge because we would like to get out quickly, but we are not sure if the vehicle that we purchased would be compatible with that and so we may have to reduce to a 240, and we will know once we install. >> very good. commissioner yee? >> i guess that this is along the same line, the question, what are the existing fleet in regards to flusher trucks and electric vehicles and so forth? >> you want to know the current composition of our fleet? >> we have about 920 or so, vehicles in our fleet. i believe that we have four flusher trucks at the moment. a few of them two or three of them, i am not sure of the exact count don't currently

meet the requirements and so that is why we are replacing this one here now as icon included in our request. and in terms of the other vehicles, let me take a look, i did bring that with me. as those 900 vehicles, we have about 50 percent of that is heavy duty vehicles, sweepers and construction vehicles and things like that. 20 percent are light duty vehicles and so that will include our sedans and trucks. >> i didn't mean the total fleet, i mean the total fleet in regards to cleaning equipment. >> cleaning equipment. >> are these electric vehicles for what? >> these electric vehicles are going to be used by the graffiti inspecters that are

out inspecting the graffiti that are called in by the residents and property owners to 311. >> okay. i got the picture now. this was described i thought with all of these vehicles had something to do with cleaning something. >> no, they are not. they are not the heavy equipment. >> thank you, so much. and i was just going to thank ken from bart who is a bart architect for also the fight that we have on the bart canopy as well. >> and he is not in today and if you are prepared and like to, hear him. he is... >> thank you commissioners for considering the hearing about the pilot project and also considering that the support of the funding this project may be taking place in san francisco in the near future.

and as a result of nearly two decades of concerns and studies of how to wait for tactile escalators and it will be used undesired out comes from the lower landing of our suburban stations in urban alignment. and it is proceeded in oakland station. and the reason that the 19th street, station was chosen as a pilot site has two main attributes and one is that it resembles some stations that muni and bart joint owned like for the downtown stations, they have two levels of the platform and the patron and the capacities very similar. two, is the patrons that use that particular exit of the station, are largely bart staff. and some of uc berkeley staff and so with all of this way inconvenience our customers and

we are stacked with our own staff. and so it is really two main reasons that we pick up at the statement and particular location for the pilot. and if you move towards the up left and the landings and the upper and the lower landings is where the incidents occurred

and the unlawful activity occurred including some of the staff get assaulted here in these locations and then, on the lower left is a typical entrance which is no identification, where you walk on the street and even meet as the architect or if you pull it right on the market street, i cannot tell that this is a power street verses the montgomery station entrance and so by providing a heed of house and provides the availability and then, last but most importantly, when it was the lower right corner, is the weather impact and the water and sometimes the human waste and the significant amount of debris from the street, have accumulated at the bottom of the escalator which is a huge volume areas for the liability and the intensity of the maintenance of the escalator and so, this really is a main

concerned area that leads to we will have some kind of a pilot to learn how effective it is to take all of these issues. and so, here is the quick list of the objectives of our pilot and first and foremost, is about three years ago, or four years ago, that state has escalator tighten eight and required that the escalator to be covered by both of the safety and the reliability issues. by providing the lock and gate at the street level and then a lighting and the good securety system will provide a better and safe patron running for both spot and muni at joined

stations and other stations alike. and the... that i would want to get for the pilot is how expensive it is. and how, easy it is to operate this unit and what are the lessons learned from other considerations put in. and here is the rendoring of the unit and by the way, and on the street and open these next week. and for the particular location and it is derived from the functionality. and the details involved. and so the finishing architecture is flexibility, to be adopted or adapted to the different from each of the locations such as the use of the colors and the use of the glazing and the use of the wide

and we call it the side screens if you look at it. and so these are elements that could be, and that are flexible and it could be adjusted, per site context. providing the evening lit mall and controlled the lit environment. >> and not only enhance. >> commissioner breed has a question. >> i am sorry, i just wanted to ask about the area i am certain that this has been studied but the area where that is behind the actual canopy, that is an area where people can like stand on, bang on, and there won't be any problems. >> yes, we will address that.

yes. >> you will get to that point? >> yes. >> as well as the vandalism that could occur, not only with breakage and the issues. >> so the back curve of that circular canopy is really designed for interclimbing and together with the glazing materials it is very difficult for climbing, the graffiti approach is what we will use is in our current elevator head of house is overlaying two layers of strong, clear vinyl sheet and so once you get excessive sheet, we will peel off one and we will install new ones, and so again, the safety and the controlled and also availability from the street scape and now, this is the typical element of this

particular pilot. as supervisor breed mentioned several areas are unique and for example, the flood area and the canopy may not exist in our joint station in muni on market street. because, the lanes of the opening is not that long, but we will pick up at this location and we just want to cover all of the possibility of a system wide as we develop at this appropriate time and the similar of other elements like the weigh findings and optional and but they are incorporated this in our pilot. and by the way, the flex part is actually the glass, and the glazing skylight that bring the daylight down to the station below. so, the results of this hopefully this canopy will be very consistent for the other

elements for the vertical transportation that we call it in the system and that is built in the various and the sustain able materials, and the steel and the stainless steel. and used them from them and the transparent and the transient materials to create the safety and feesbility and also use the led back light as a lighting as a back lit for way finding illuminating for the environment purpose. so, we will encourage that the patrons feel comfortable to use those vertical elements system-wide. and here is the project schedule for this pilot. as i mentioned it is on the street and opening next week and we are anticipate about 6 to 7 months of construction, and again, because of the advantage of value, is and it is using that exit is most

likely we can close off in time and exit for construction to speed up and the budget is typically we look at and caused various on the side of conditions, we look at it in the two million dollars per head of the house and so that is all of the other pilots, if you have any questions, and i am more than happy to answer. >> thank you i just wanted to ask, earlier it was brought up that we locally have the main nens and the responsibility for seven of our bart and i think that it is 8 san francisco bart stations what is the other bart station that bart is responsible for? >> bart responsible for is it called geneva? which station? owned and operated? in addition to the boss stations. >> my understanding is that there are seven bart stations. >> that is correct. >> mta is responsible for. there are 8 bart stations in san francisco, so which